Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- explanations:public-interest [2017/04/14 03:27] – Shrawan
+++ explanations:public-interest [2023/04/15 11:04] (current) – Shrawan
@@ Line 23: / Line 23: @@
 The Supreme Court in Bihar Public Service Commission v. Saiyed Hussain Abbas Rizwi (2012) 13 SCC 61((Bihar Public Service Commission v. Saiyed Hussain Abbas Rizwi (2012) 13 SCC 61)) held  that  the  statutory  exemption  provided  under [[Act:|Section 8]] of the Act is the rule and only in exceptional circumstances of larger  public interest the information would be disclosed. It was also held that 'public purpose' needs to be interpreted in the strict sense and public interest has to be construed keeping in mind the balance between right to privacy and right to information.  The relevant extract from the said judgment is quoted below:
-//22.	“The expression "public interest" has to be understood in its true connotation so as to give complete meaning to the relevant provisions of the  Act. The expression "public interest" must be viewed in its strict sense with all its exceptions so as to justify denial of a statutory exemption in terms of the  Act. In its common parlance, the expression "public interest", like "public purpose", is not capable of any precise definition. It does not have a rigid meaning, is elastic and takes its colour from the statute in which it occurs, the concept varying with time and state of society and its needs ((State of Bihar v. Kameshwar Singh AIR 1952 SC 252])). It also means the general welfare of the public that warrants recognition and protection; something in which the public as a whole has a stake [Black's Law Dictionary (8th  Edn.)]//
+''22.	“The expression "public interest" has to be understood in its true connotation so as to give complete meaning to the relevant provisions of the  Act. The expression "public interest" must be viewed in its strict sense with all its exceptions so as to justify denial of a statutory exemption in terms of the  Act. In its common parlance, the expression "public interest", like "public purpose", is not capable of any precise definition. It does not have a rigid meaning, is elastic and takes its colour from the statute in which it occurs, the concept varying with time and state of society and its needs ((State of Bihar v. Kameshwar Singh AIR 1952 SC 252])). It also means the general welfare of the public that warrants recognition and protection; something in which the public as a whole has a stake [Black's Law Dictionary (8th  Edn.)]''
-//23.	The satisfaction has to be arrived at by the authorities objectively and the consequences of such disclosure have to be weighed with regard to the circumstances of a given case. The decision has to be based on **objective satisfaction recorded for ensuring that larger public interest outweighs unwarranted invasion of privacy** or other factors stated in the provision.  Certain matters, particularly in relation to appointment, are  required  to  be dealt  with great confidentiality.”//
+''23.	The satisfaction has to be arrived at by the authorities objectively and the consequences of such disclosure have to be weighed with regard to the circumstances of a given case. The decision has to be based on **objective satisfaction recorded for ensuring that larger public interest outweighs unwarranted invasion of privacy** or other factors stated in the provision.  Certain matters, particularly in relation to appointment, are  required  to  be dealt  with great confidentiality.”''
 The Hon’ble High Court in its decision dated 13/07/2012((W.P. (C) No. 1243 of 2011- UPSC vs. R.K. Jain)) wherein while discussing on the issue of disclosure of information in larger public interest the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi had held as under:
@@ Line 33: / Line 33: @@
 Furthermore, the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in (Girish Ramchandra Deshpande vs. Central Information Commission & ors.)(((Girish Ramchandra Deshpande vs. Central Information Commission & ors.) SLP(C) No. 27734 of 2012 dated 03/10/2012)) is pertinent, wherein it was held as under:
-//“:13............Of course, in a given case, if the Central Public Information Officer  or the State Public Information Officer of the Appellate Authority is  satisfied  that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information, appropriate orders could be passed but the petitioner cannot claim those  details as a matter of right.”//
+''“:13............Of course, in a given case, if the Central Public Information Officer  or the State Public Information Officer of the Appellate Authority is  satisfied  that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information, appropriate orders could be passed but the petitioner cannot claim those  details as a matter of right.”''
 The judgment of  Hon’ble  Supreme Court in determining larger public interest in R.K. Jain vs. Union of India (1993) 4 SCC 120((R.K. Jain vs. Union of India (1993) 4 SCC 120)) where it was observed as under:
@@ Line 60: / Line 60: @@
 ~~LINKBACK~~
+~~socialite~~